Joaquin Alberto Vega-Tercero v. Immigration and Naturalization Service

JOAQUIN ALBERTO VEGA-TERCERO, Petitioner, v. IMMIGRATION AND
NATURALIZATION SERVICE, Respondent.
No. 91-70311 UNITED STATES COURT OF APPEALS FOR THE NINTH CIRCUIT
February 1, 1993, ** Submitted, Pasadena, California ** The panel unanimously finds this case suitable for
submission on the record and briefs and without oral
argument. Fed. R. App. P. 34(a), Ninth Circuit R. 34-4.
February 23, 1993, Filed

Subsequent History: Reported as Table Case at 988 F.2d 126.

Prior History:

Petition to Review a Decision of the Immigration and Naturalization Service, INS No. A70-265-654

Disposition:

REMANDED.

Judges:

Before: HUG, FERGUSON, and O'SCANNLAIN, Circuit Judges.

Opinion:

MEMORANDUM* Joaquin Alberto Vega-Tercero, a native and citizen of Nicaragua, seeks asylum in the United States or, in the alternative, withholding of deportation. See 8 U.S.C. §§ 1158(a) & 1253(h). The immigration judge denied the relief requested by Vega-Tercero and the Board of Immigration Appeals ("BIA") dismissed the subsequent appeal. To support its conclusion that Vega-Tercero failed to establish a well-founded fear of persecution, the BIA took administrative notice of the change of government in Nicaragua in 1990. The noticed facts form the sole basis for the BIA's decision. Accordingly, we grant the government's motion for remand in light of this court's decision in Castillo-Villagra v. INS, 972 F.2d 1017, 1029 (9th Cir. 1992) (error to take administrative notice of change of government without providing opportunity to rebut the noticed facts).[1] REMANDED.


[1]Because the BIA's use of administrative notice justifies remand, we do not reach the issue whether the BIA's decision in this case runs afoul of this circuit's prohibition against the use of "boilerplate opinions." See Castillo v. INS, 951 F.2d 1117, 1121 (9th Cir. 1991) (BIA decision must include
"statements that evidence an individualized review of the petitioner's contentions and circumstances").
Comments:
Submitted: 1 February, 1993; Filed: 23 February, 1993 The panel unanimously finds this case suitable for submission on the record and briefs and without oral argument
Disclaimer:

This is not a UNHCR publication. UNHCR is not responsible for, nor does it necessarily endorse, its content. Any views expressed are solely those of the author or publisher and do not necessarily reflect those of UNHCR, the United Nations or its Member States.